Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imee Marcos' Misuse of Tobacco Excise Tax Funds

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. apparent consensus after improvements and 2 relists DGG ( talk ) 23:53, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Imee Marcos' Misuse of Tobacco Excise Tax Funds

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is ~basically~ an attack piece with sources; i would have nominated per WP:ATTACK but it has sources. There is also an WP:UNDUE/WP:NOTNEWS issue. The content is about an unfolding scandal, which may or may not turn out to have substance, and has intricate detail that is not encyclopedic - yet omits key details. Even the main independent source for this, notes that the investigation is being led by Rodolfo Fariñas, who leads the other political clan that has ruled the tobacco-growing province for decades, but this page somehow fails to mention this. In addition, this matter is already discussed in the the article about this person at Imee_Marcos#Misuse_of_tobacco_funds, which is sufficient detail for now. Jytdog (talk) 17:14, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Covered already at more than sufficient length in the BLP proper. No reason for this additional article, and Wikipedia is already too politicized about many people. This particular article has no strong reason to remain, and its title posits that she committed a crime as a matter of fact. Collect (talk) 18:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. Ajf773 (talk) 18:32, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per previous. Given existing sources, this belongs on her page, not a separate page. Ravensfire (talk) 18:47, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep after the work done to completely revamp this article - nice job! Ravensfire (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Imee Marcos § Misuse of tobacco funds. This has had sustained focused coverage, so I would call it notable. If there were more discussion in the article about the tobacco tax or the whole ring of people who were involved in this, I might accept a separate article, but given the focus on Marcos, I agree that this is better kept in her biography. Daask (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Imee Marcos § Misuse of tobacco fund per Daask. I think the subject does not need its own spinoff yet and can still be explained in the parent article. --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:09, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reorient - I'll second Daask's comment regarding sustained focused coverage, and also agree that there's more to the topic than Marcos. I've actually been thinking of ways to re-orient this article ever since I first became aware of it, but I haven't developed as close a familiarity with this specific case as I'd like, so I haven't managed to act on that impulse yet. - Alternativity (talk) 16:14, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Since I see that the title of the article has so much to do with how focused it is on Marcos, I've taken the liberty of moving the page from "Imee Marcos' Misuse of Tobacco Excise Tax Funds" to "Ilocos Norte Tobacco Excise Tax funds controversy." I've also done minor revisions to the lede section and will try to make some changes further down in the text, as soon as I am able to do so. - Alternativity (talk) 16:50, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Second Update: I've made a number of changes to the article to clarify and further expand its scope, including a backgrounder on Tobacco in the Ilocos provinces and on the Tobacco fund law, and a section on previous controversies involving President Estrada and Ilocos Sur. I've also added a "missing information" hatnote in the section listing the individuals accused. I think that for the purposes of NPOV there needs to be a section on dynastic politics in the Ilocos region, and I think that the article chronology needs to be improved. But since this is not a historical era in which I have much expertise, I'll leave that all up to editors more up-to-date on current events. (Sorry, I'm mostly useful for providing historical backgrounds.) So I think that's it for me for now. Re-stating my vote as Keep but Reorient and Expand.- Alternativity (talk) 03:46, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I had already regarded it as notable, and I am satisfied that Alternativity's efforts have substantially taken the focus away from Imee Marcos to such a degree that I doubt anyone would consider this an attack piece. The context of Prior Controversies on use of Tobacco Excise Tax funds is especially helpful, and is not suitable for merging in any other article. Daask (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There have been substantial changes to the article, and the only comment after those changes argues that it has been improved enough to keep. Relisting for another week to give people a chance to consider the new version.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 16:17, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Daask and the changes made by Alternativity, et al. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 19:26, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, if we're doing a second round of voting. Although I suppose my having been the one to make the needed changes to the article imply that my "keep" vote is a given. - Alternativity (talk) 23:37, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting that there is no change in my !vote based on the recent edits. This is still all entirely UNDUE, WP:NOTNEWS content, covered adequately in the page on the person. Jytdog (talk) 23:46, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - my Filipino partner, whose ancestry is based in Ilocos Norte, assures me this is a big scandal. It's not just about Imee Marcos. I have seen the articles in the Fil-Am press. Bearian (talk) 00:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:52, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think Alternatvity has done a great job of changing the article to something more encyclopedic. It's a close one but the article now passes WP:NOTNEWS, imo. – FenixFeather ^{(talk)(Contribs)} 00:03, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.